New from Cambridge University Press!

Edited By Keith Allan and Kasia M. Jaszczolt

This book "fills the unquestionable need for a comprehensive and up-to-date handbook on the fast-developing field of pragmatics" and "includes contributions from many of the principal figures in a wide variety of fields of pragmatic research as well as some up-and-coming pragmatists."

_Possible and Probable Languages_ (PPL) serves as an excellent referencebook or supplemental reading for a typology course or a syntax coursefocused on the question of language variation and/or acquisition. PPLprovides a comprehensive overview of the principal research on languageuniversals and the motivation behind the research within the framework ofgenerative syntax and more recently, Optimality Theory. Citing Chomsky'sevolving views on Greenberg's universals, Newmeyer details how Chomsky'sideas changed during the 70s, 80s, and 90s, on the relationship betweencross-linguistic variation and the principles of universal grammar (UG). In summarizing Chomsky's contributions as well as the work of otherprominent linguists, Newmeyer takes issue with particular aspects of theclaims of functionalism and formalism in hopes of showing that neitherapproach alone can account for language variation. PPL's goal is clear:both language use and a formal structural system are necessary to explainthe relationship between grammatical form and outside forces shaping theworld's languages.

SUMMARY

Chapter 1

''On the Possible and Probable in Language'' is a summary of languageuniversals and their explanation from functionalist and formalistviewpoints. Newmeyer provides examples of possible and improbable featuresof languages from the typological literature as well as ''The UniversalsArchive'' that is housed at the University of Konstanz and availableelectronically. These universals provide a backdrop for a discussion ofexperiments where subjects tried to learn ''unnatural'' rules with respect toreal and unreal languages. These experiments suggest two things: 1) thathumans adapt more readily to learnable rules and hence, there is a linkbetween innateness and possible grammars; 2) although a rule may appear as''improbable,'' it does not imply that it is impossible, but simplynon-occurring.

Chapter 2

''Parameterized Principles'' looks at how early generative syntax neglectedwhat typology had brought to light in the 60s regarding cross-linguisticvariation and instead, sought solutions to various syntactic questions intheoretical assumptions based on language-specific discoveries. Newmeyerwalks the reader through numerous examples of how UG later returned toanswering questions of cross-linguistic variation in word order, gapping,etc., by delving into markedness, deep vs. surface structures,parameterized principles, and currently, optional features on functionalheads. However, it becomes apparent that UG's goal is antithetical to thehard-sought goal of explanatory elegance since numerous constraints wereneeded to account for and predict an ''unexpected (and previously unnoticed)clustering of typological properties'' (p. 44-45).

Chapter 3

''Parameters, Performance, and the Explanation of TypologicalGeneralizations'' zeros in on particular principles of UG such as ''HeadParameter,'' and ''Subjacency,'' and how these principles and theircorresponding parameter settings fall short when accounting for linguisticvariation and the correlation of other language features. Newmeyermaintains that Greenberg alone has been successful in correlating the basicword order of a language with other morphosyntactic features. Newmeyer'sextensive grasp of the literature in these areas makes for a veryconvincing argument while leading the reader to conclude that ''the degreeof grammatical variation is in fact highly constrained, but much more byperformance factors than by UG'' (p.75). Newmeyer concludes this chapter byreviewing Hawkins' (2004) hypothesis of ''Performance-GrammarCorrespondence'' as the means for explaining efficiency in language.

Chapter 4

''In Defense of the Saussurean View of Grammar'' sets out to defend researchin formal grammar and the notion that mental grammar is integral tolanguage use. Newmeyer begins, however, by showing that ''language usersare sensitive to the frequency of grammatical forms'' (p.130). He thenseeks to counter the supposed ''disparity'' between the formal structuresthat grammars describe and the utterances people make by arguing thatspeakers have a full argument structure (SVO, SOV, etc.) although they mayproduce only parts of the full-blown structures. Newmeyer cites examplesfrom Merchant (2004) on seven different languages that illustrate howspeakers respect morphological case even when replies are fragments. Hethen provides additional examples that show how speakers rely on inferenceto decipher the language code, which is ultimately only a partial conveyorof what speakers need grammars to do. With respect to language change,Newmeyer devotes several pages to data (reflexives and differential objectmarking) that attempt to disprove that a need to lessen ambiguity has ledto certain morphosyntactic features; he claims that speakers rely insteadon ''the well-established hypothesis that within a given domain, morefrequent combinations of features require less coding than less frequentones'' (p. 158). Although Newmeyer spends time arguing that if ''speakerswere really driven to reduce potential ambiguity'' (p. 159), they would putobjects before all other linguistic constituents since an object is morepredictive of verb type than the subject is, he chooses not to invoke theargument he uses a few pages later that ''our interpretation of astructurally ambiguous string is determined in large part by real-wordcontextual factors that have nothing at all to do with grammar, no matterhow broadly defined'' (p.162). He ends the chapter by decrying stochasticgrammars and advocating that language evolution had to have begun withconceptual structures that were translated into sounds via grammar suchthat as communication evolved, use and grammar evolved imperfectly.

Chapter 5

''The Locus of Functional Explanation'' addresses specifically whether anatomistic or holistic functionalism explains the ''functional pressures andthe typological distribution of formal elements that represents a responseto those pressures'' (p. 174). Newmeyer is upfront that his position restson the side of the holistic approach, which he explains as one that claimsno direct link between function and use. The link between function and useis indirect and evolves through language use and acquisition and ultimatelyplays itself out typologically according to Newmeyer. He argues thatatomistic functionalism (AF) is unable to provide all the possible externalfactors motivating language, and that the literature has obscured this factto a certain degree. The last part of the chapter is a rebuttal to theclaims of Optimality Theory (OT); in particular, Newmeyer takes issue withthose who argue that the constraints put forth in OT can be accounted forfunctionally, i.e., FOT. He replies specifically to claims made by Aissen(1999, 2003) that differential object marking can be explained by OTconstraints. The OT machinery required to account for the varioushierarchies implied within the given data essentially contradict thefunctional explanations, i.e., they are too convoluted since ''there is noway for a correct form to emerge without competition between rival forms. Therefore, one needs to set up a proliferation of candidate sets, simply toensure that a 'winner' results.'' (p. 223).

EVALUATION

PPL bears witness to the fact that the functionalist viewpoint is beingheard and taken seriously. While Newmeyer brings together the majorresearch initiatives of the last forty years and seeks to highlight whateach does best, his overview of OT was much too brief for anyone tounderstand it without some background in the representative tableaux. Hismotive for having a discussion of OT in the book is not to laud itscontributions to the field of syntax in the past decade, but to show itsinadequacy as a means for explaining typological generalizations within atheory of interacting constraints.

Many in the formal linguistic community will bristle at Newmeyer'sconclusions. Others will recognize the merit in what he says and may, withtime, begin to change the direction of theoretical linguistics as well. They can't dismiss the book. It is meticulously researched, comprehensive,and written by a linguist of stature. Newmeyer's clarity of thought andexpression make the book more accessible than many of the originalarticles. His juxtaposing of various views provides a larger context forevaluating the research efforts of those linguists cited in the book. PPLis an excellent resource for graduate students and linguists who want tokeep pace with recent developments in the field of linguistics, but haven'tthe time to absorb all the literature across competing frameworks.Moreover, it is a summary of Newmeyer's views on how the forces of languageuse and formal grammar join together as language is acquired and evolvesover time to eventually provide the typological patterns found throughoutthe world's languages.

Editing comments: Glossing of examples was not consistent such as p. 38where the Dutch is given a word-for-word gloss, but the Italian isn't. Page 34 inserted English ''the'' in the German example in (11b) while on page36, example (16) omitted the gloss ''person.'' Despite careful introductionto theoretical terms in UG, Newmeyer refers to ''LF'' with no explanation onp. 44 and to ''X-bar schema'' on p. 49, but explains it on p. 105. Omissionof the word ''to'' occurs in the last paragraph of p. 83. The expression''neutralize adjectives'' is first used on p. 85 but not defined until p. 86. E-language is defined on p. 105, but not I-language. The tables andtableaux are not always appropriately placed within the text and cause thereader to ''search and find'' to get the needed examples as he or she reads,especially on pp. 199-200.